World Heritage Site

A
World Heritage Site
is a landmark or area which has been officially recognized by the United Nations, specifically by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). Sites are selected on the basis of having cultural, historical, scientific or some other form of significance, and they are legally protected by international treaties. UNESCO regards these sites as being important to the collective interests of humanity.

More specifically, a World Heritage Site is an already classified landmark, which by way of being unique in some respect as a geographically and historically identifiable piece is of special cultural or physical significance (such as either due to hosting an ancient ruins or some historical structure, building, city, complex, desert, forest, island, lake, monument, or mountain) and symbolizes a remarkable footprint of extreme human endeavour often coupled with some act of indisputable accomplishment of humanity which then serves as a surviving evidence of its intellectual existence on the planet.

With the intent of its practical conservation for posterity, which otherwise could be subject to risk from human or animal trespassing, owing to unmonitored/uncontrolled/unrestricted access or threat owing to local administrative negligence, sites are listed and demarcated by UNESCO to have been identified or recognised as a protected zone.
[1]The list
is maintained by the international World Heritage Programme administered by the UNESCO World Heritage Committee, composed of 21 UNESCO
member states
which are elected by the UN General Assembly.[2]

The programme catalogues, names, and conserves sites of outstanding
cultural
or natural
importance to the common culture and heritage of humanity. Under certain conditions, listed sites can obtain funds from the World Heritage Fund. The program was founded with the
Convention Concerning the Protection of the World's Cultural and Natural Heritage,[3]
which was adopted by the General Conference of UNESCO on 16 November 1972. Since then, 193 state parties have ratified the convention, making it one of the most adhered to international instruments and the normative cultural instrument with the highest number of ratifications.

In 1954, the government of
Egypt
decided to build the new Aswan High Dam, whose resulting future reservoir would eventually
inundate
a large stretch of the Nile
valley containing cultural treasures of ancient Egypt
and ancient Nubia. In 1959, the governments of Egypt and
Sudan
requested UNESCO to assist their countries to protect and rescue the endangered monuments and sites. In 1960, the Director-General of UNESCO launched an appeal to the Member States for an International Campaign to Save the Monuments of Nubia.[6]
This appeal resulted in the excavation and recording of hundreds of sites, the recovery of thousands of objects, as well as the salvage and relocation to higher ground of a number of important temples, the most famous of which are the temple complexes of Abu Simbel
and Philae. The campaign, which ended in 1980, was considered a success. As tokens of its gratitude to countries which especially contributed to the campaign's success, Egypt donated four temples: the
Temple of Dendur
was moved to the Metropolitan Museum of Art
in New York City, the Temple of Debod
was moved to the Parque del Oeste
in Madrid, the Temple of Taffeh
was moved to the Rijksmuseum van Oudheden
in the Netherlands, and the Temple of Ellesyia
to Museo Egizio
in Turin.[7]

The project cost $80 million, about $40 million of which was collected from 50 countries. The project's success led to other safeguarding campaigns: saving
Venice
and its lagoon
in Italy, the ruins of Mohenjo-daro
in Pakistan, and the Borobodur
Temple Compounds in Indonesia. UNESCO then initiated, with the International Council on Monuments and Sites, a draft convention to protect the common cultural heritage of humanity.

The United States initiated the idea of cultural conservation with nature conservation. The
White House
conference in 1965 called for a "World Heritage Trust" to preserve "the world's superb natural and scenic areas and historic sites for the present and the future of the entire world citizenry". The International Union for Conservation of Nature
developed similar proposals in 1968, and they were presented in 1972 to the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment
in Stockholm. Under the World Heritage Committee, signatory countries are required to produce and submit periodic
data reporting
providing the World Heritage Committee with an overview of each participating nation's implementation of the World Heritage Convention and a "snapshot" of current conditions at World Heritage properties.

A single text was agreed on by all parties, and the "Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage" was adopted by the General Conference of UNESCO on 16 November 1972.

A country must first list its significant cultural and natural sites; the result is called the Tentative List. A country may not nominate sites that have not been first included on the Tentative List. Next, it can place sites selected from that list into a Nomination File.

The Nomination File is evaluated by the
International Council on Monuments and Sites
and the World Conservation Union. These bodies then make their recommendations to the World Heritage Committee. The Committee meets once per year to determine whether or not to inscribe each nominated property on the World Heritage List and sometimes defers or refers the decision to request more information from the country which nominated the site. There are ten selection criteria – a site must meet at least one of them to be included on the list.[9]

Up to 2004, there were six criteria for cultural heritage and four criteria for natural heritage. In 2005, this was modified so that there is now only one set of ten criteria. Nominated sites must be of "outstanding universal value" and meet at least one of the ten criteria.[10]
These criteria have been modified or/amended several times since their creation.

"represents a masterpiece of human creative genius and cultural significance"

"exhibits an important interchange of human values, over a span of time, or within a cultural area of the world, on developments in architecture or technology, monumental arts, town-planning, or landscape design"

"to bear a unique or at least exceptional testimony to a cultural tradition or to a civilization which is living or which has disappeared"

"is an outstanding example of a type of building, architectural, or technological ensemble or landscape which illustrates a significant stage in human history"

"is an outstanding example of a traditional human settlement, land-use, or sea-use which is representative of a culture, or human interaction with the environment especially when it has become vulnerable under the impact of irreversible change"

"is directly or tangibly associated with events or living traditions, with ideas, or with beliefs, with artistic and literary works of outstanding universal significance"[11]

"is an outstanding example representing major stages of Earth's history, including the record of life, significant on-going geological processes in the development of landforms, or significant geomorphic or physiographic features"

"is an outstanding example representing significant on-going ecological and biological processes in the evolution and development of terrestrial, fresh water, coastal and marine ecosystems, and communities of plants and animals"

"contains the most important and significant natural habitats for in-situ conservation of biological diversity, including those containing threatened species of outstanding universal value from the point of view of science or conservation"

"Article 53. PROTECTION OF CULTURAL OBJECTS AND OF PLACES OF WORSHIP. Without prejudice to the provisions of the Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict of 14 May 1954,' and of other relevant international instruments, it is prohibited:[12]

(a) To commit any acts of hostility directed against the historic monuments, works of art or places of worship which constitute the cultural or spiritual heritage of peoples;

A country may request to extend or reduce the boundaries, modify the official name, or change the selection criteria of one of its already listed sites. Any proposal for a significant boundary change or modify the site's selection criteria must be submitted as if it were a new nomination, including first placing it on the Tentative List and then onto the Nomination File.[9]

A request for a minor boundary change, one that does not have a significantly impact on the extent of the property or affect its "outstanding universal value", is also evaluated by the advisory bodies before being sent to the Committee. Such proposals can be rejected by either the advisory bodies or the Committee if they judge it to be a significant change instead of a minor one.[9]

Proposals to change the site's official name is sent directly to the Committee.[9]

A site may be added to the
List of World Heritage in Danger
if there are conditions that threaten the characteristics for which the landmark or area was inscribed on the World Heritage List. Such problems may involve armed conflict and war, natural disasters, pollution, poaching, or uncontrolled urbanization or human development. This danger list is intended to increase international awareness of the threats and to encourage counteractive measures. Threats to a site can be either proven imminent threats or potential dangers that could have adverse effects on a site.[13]

The state of conservation for each site on the danger list is reviewed on a yearly basis, after which the committee may request additional measures, delete the property from the list if the threats have ceased or consider deletion from both the List of World Heritage in Danger and the World Heritage List.[9]

Only two sites have ever been
delisted: the
Arabian Oryx Sanctuary
in Oman and the Dresden Elbe Valley
in Germany. The Arabian Oryx Sanctuary was directly delisted in 2007, instead of first being put on the danger list, after the Omani government decided to reduce the protected area's size by 90 percent.[14]
The Dresden Elbe Valley was first placed on the danger list in 2006 when the World Heritage Committee decided that plans to construct the Waldschlösschen Bridge
would significantly alter the valley's landscape. In response, the Dresden City Council attempted to stop the bridge's construction, but after several court decisions allowed the building of the bridge to proceed, the valley was removed from the World Heritage List in 2009.[15]

There are 1073 World Heritage Sites located in 167 States Party. Of these, 832 are cultural, 206 are natural and 35 are mixed properties. The World Heritage Committee has divided the world into five geographic zones which it calls regions: Africa, Arab States, Asia and the Pacific, Europe and North America, and Latin America and the Caribbean.

Russia and the
Caucasus
states are classified as European, while Mexico and the Caribbean are classified as belonging to the Latin America & Caribbean zone, despite their location in North America. The UNESCO geographic zones also give greater emphasis on administrative, rather than geographic associations. Hence, Gough Island, located in the South Atlantic, is part of the Europe & North America region because the government of the United Kingdom nominated the site.

The table below includes a breakdown of the sites according to these zones and their classification:[16][17]

Despite the myriad documented positive impacts that World Heritage listing has provided in terms of promoting conservation, the UNESCO administered project has also attracted criticism for under-representation of heritage sites outside Europe and disputed decisions on site inclusion.[18]
A sizable lobbying industry has grown around the awards; World Heritage listing has the potential to significantly increase lucrative tourism revenues to selected sites. Site listing bids are often lengthy and costly putting poorer countries at a disadvantage. Eritrea's efforts to promote Asmara
reflected one such example.[19]

In 2016 media reports highlighted that the Australian Government had actively lobbied to have criticism of
Great Barrier Reef
conservation efforts removed from a UNESCO report titled 'World Heritage and Tourism in a Changing Climate'. The Australian Government's actions were in response to concerns about the negative impact that an at risk label could have on tourism revenues at a previously designated UNESCO World Heritage site.[20][21]